Theological Institute of Connecticut v. Barbour

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Theological Institute of Connecticut v. Barbour

70 Mass. 329

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1855

StatusPublished

This text of 70 Mass. 329 (Theological Institute of Connecticut v. Barbour) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Theological Institute of Connecticut v. Barbour, 70 Mass. 329 (Mass. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

Shaw, C. J.

At the expiration of the lease for a year, if the lessees had continued in possession by the assent of the lessor, they vould be, by law, tenants at will; and it might be held that both lessees, while that relation lasted, were tenants at will. But by the decease of Mrs. Waldo, or at least by the conveyance to these plaintiffs, the tenancy at will ceased. Benedict v. Morse, 10 Met. 229. The right of the plaintiffs to receive rent, after they became owners in fee of the estate, was a right on an implied promise to recover a quantum meruit for use and occupation ; and the law raises this promise only against a party who has the actual use and enjoyment of the estate. By the statement of facts it appears that Barbour had the occupation, and Miss Greenough was a mere boarder.

Judgment for the defendant Greenough.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Shaw, C. J.

At the expiration of the lease for a year, if the lessees had continued in possession by the assent of the lessor, they vould be, by law, tenants at will; and it might be held that both lessees, while that relation lasted, were tenants at will. But by the decease of Mrs. Waldo, or at least by the conveyance to these plaintiffs, the tenancy at will ceased. Benedict v. Morse, 10 Met. 229. The right of the plaintiffs to receive rent, after they became owners in fee of the estate, was a right on an implied promise to recover a quantum meruit for use and occupation ; and the law raises this promise only against a party who has the actual use and enjoyment of the estate. By the statement of facts it appears that Barbour had the occupation, and Miss Greenough was a mere boarder.

Judgment for the defendant Greenough.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 Mass. 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/theological-institute-of-connecticut-v-barbour-mass-1855.